The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty in the absence of assault against the victim is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the defendant.
2. The first instance court’s judgment was clearly erroneous when it was intended to re-examine the first instance court’s judgment and subsequently determine it ex post facto, although there was no objective reason to affect the formation of a documentary evidence in the process of the trial.
There should be reasonable grounds to deem that the argument leading to the fact-finding is remarkably unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules, and without such exceptional circumstances, the judgment on the fact-finding of the first instance court should not be reversed without permission (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do18031, Mar. 22, 2017). In addition, in a case where a witness’s statement is mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it shall not be dismissed without permission, unless there is any other reliable evidence to deem that the witness’s statement conforms to the facts charged objectively and objectively unfair (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). In other words, the following circumstances recognized by the evidence duly adopted and duly examined by the lower court, namely, the CCTV at the scene at the time of the instant crime, where the Defendant satisfying the victim’s vehicle by driving the vehicle, and the witness also committed an assault against the victim’s vehicle with his own ebuck.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.
3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.